Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World
This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in
the world by JSTOR.
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries.
We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial
purposes.
Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.istor.org/participate-istor/individuals/early-
journal-content .
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact support@jstor.org.
Archaeological
Institute
of America
THREE ARGIVE LEKYTHI IN THE MUSEUM OF
FINE ARTS IN BOSTON
[Plates IV, V, VI]
The three lekythi here published for the first time form
a notable feature of the recent acquisitions of the Boston
Museum. Little is known of their exact provenance. No. I
was purchased by the Museum in 1895, having previously
changed hands several times, and was finally traced to an
Athenian dealer, according to whose account it came from
Thebes. Nos. II and III were acquired by the Museum in
the same year, together with another lekythos (not yet pub-
lished) decorated with a band of sphinxes and lions, from a
private collector, who had bought all three at Corinth, but who
had been unable to obtain any information as to their history
or finding-place. The description which here follows has been
drawn in the main from the inventory of the Museum.
I (Plate IV) (Inv. No. 6506). Lekythos; height, 0.067 m.
Form similar to those in the Berlin Antiquarium (Furt-
wangler, Vasensammlung^ pi. v. No. 102). Body plummet
shaped, with cylindrical neck and base, broad flat lip and
handle. Clay pale greenish yellow. With the exception of
the neck, the entire vase is covered with decoration. On the
top of the lip is a radiating pattern divided into two parts;
the inner a wave pattern, encircling the opening, and the outer
a tongue pattern. Around the rim a simple meander. On
the outside of the handle a triple -plait pattern, and on the
shoulder a palmette lotus chain. Below this, encircling the
body of the vase, is the principal design — Bellerophon's fight
American Journal of Archaeology, Second Series, Journal of the 441
Archaeological Institute of America, Vol. IV (1900), No. 4.
American Journal of Archaeology, Second Series Vol. IV 11900) Plate IV
ARGIVE LEKYTHI IN THE BOSTON MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS: NO. I
442 JOSEPH CLARK HOPPIN
with the Chimaera. The horse Pegasus is represented in pro-
file, flying to left, his wings, of the Oriental type, being indi-
cated in dark brown and red. He wears a bridle, the reins of
which are held by Bellerophon, represented as bearded ^ with
the flesh drawn in violet paint, in his left, while preparing
to hurl his spear with his right.^ The Chimaera advancing
toward him, in profile to right, is of the usual type, with lion's
head and body, goat's head and neck projecting from the cen-
tre of his back, and tail in the form of a serpent. Red paint
is used on the necks of the lion and goat, the tongue of the
former being indicated in violet. On either side of the prin-
cipal group is a sphinx, with a stephane on its head, walking
away from the central figures. They are separated by a verti-
cal scroll pattern directly beneath the handle. In the field
rosettes, crosses, pothooks, and various geometrical designs,
and between the Chimaera and Pegasus a lizard. Below the
central frieze is a smaller frieze representing dogs chasing a
hare. Below this is a band of double-plait pattern, and around
the foot are rays. All decorations are in a dark chocolate brown,
with very delicately incised lines used in all the figures. The
vase is intact.
II (Plate V) (Inv. No. 6507). Lekythos ; height, 0.065 m.
Shape similar to No. I, but with less elaborate decoration. On
the lip are three bands, the inner a meander, then a wave pat-
tern, and rays on the outside. Around the rim dots. On
the handle a double-plait between two vertical bands of a
herring-bone pattern. On the shoulder a palmette lotus chain,
in which the scrolls are curved inward, like the volutes of an
Ionic capital. Around the body a frieze containing the prin-
cipal design. In the centre a lion, profile to right, from whose
1 The beard itself has almost disappeared, and only a careful scrutiny of the
surface with a glass reveals any traces of it. For this reason it escaped the
notice of the designer of the drawing, and is not indicated.
2 It would seem at first sight as if the spear were held in the left hand, but
as the right is the natural spear hand, and as the spear passes behind Bellero-
phon's head, there can be no question on this point ; faulty drawing is respon-
sible for the confusion.
American Journal of Archaeology, Second Series Vol. IV (1900) Plate V
ARGIVE LEKYTHI IN THE BOSTON MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS: NO. II
THREE ARGIVE LEKYTHI 443
back grows a bearded human head. Facing him a warrior to
left, armed with Corinthian helmet, cuirass, and greaves. In
his right he carries his spear horizontally, as if about to thrust,
and in his left a shield (device, flying eagle). Behind the war-
rior a panther, crouching, body in profile, head full front ;
behind the lion, under the handle, a winged, male, bearded
figure, in the usual flying and running schema. Below, a
band of rosettes and geometrical ornaments ; around the foot,
rays. Clay of a pale brownish color, with decoration in vari-
ous shades of brown running almost to black. Incised lines
used in all the figures. The vase is intact.
Ill (Plate VI) (Inv. No. 6508). Lekythos ; height, 0.07 m.
Shape similar to preceding. Pale brownish yellow clay. With
the exception of the neck, the entire vase is covered with deco-
ration. On the lip three bands, ' star ' ornament in the centre,
wave pattern, and rays outside. Around the rim a simple
meander, and on the handle a triple-plait pattern. On the
shoulder a frieze, a lion to right about to spring on a goat
walking to left. Behind the latter another goat browsing to
right. In the field pothooks, Maltese crosses, rosettes, and
geometric ornaments. Around the body is the principal de-
sign, as follows :
In the middle a centaur of the earliest type, with the entire
figure of a man joined to the body and hind legs of a horse,
walking to right. He is bearded, and wears a short, close-
fitting jacket with short sleeves. In his right, extended behind
him, he holds the branch of a tree, and leans with his left upon
a long staff, which is seized by another figure advancing to
left. The latter is bearded, and wears a garment not unlike
that of the centaur, with greaves upon his legs ; a large sword
hangs at his side, and in his raised left he holds an object with
four prongs. Behind him, running to right, is a youthful,
beardless figure, carrying a sword in his right, his left raised.
Between this figure and the centaur at the back, a sort of
pedestal, surmounted by a round object, on which two eagles
are perched. On either side is a flying eagle. In the field
444 JOSEPH CLABK HOPPIN
sivastiJcas^ rosettes, pothooks, and geometric designs similar to
those on Nos. I and II. The decoration is in dark brown, with
incised lines ; red is freely used in all the figures. The lip
and handle have been broken off, but repaired without resto-
rations.
That the subject of No. I is Bellerophon's fight with the
Chimaera is, of course, evident ; but the explanation of the sub-
jects of Nos. II and III is not apparent at first sight. Before
considering the vases in detail, it will be well, even at the risk
of repeating some well-known facts, to define the Argive style,
and to discuss its proper position in Greek ceramic art.
I have used the term ' Argive ' rather than ' Protocorinthian,'
since a careful study of this period during the past three years
has convinced me that the old term is thoroughly unsatisfac-
tory, and that the rightful home of the style lies in the Argolid.
While I cannot regard the Argolic origin of the so-called
' Protocorinthian ' style as being absolutely established, the
reasons for assigning the style to that locality are too strong
to be ignored, and give, at least, a name infinitely more ap-
propriate than the old one. That was a term invented by
Furtwangler,! not as a definite statement of its origin, but simply
to signify its priority to the Corinthian class, with which it has
much in common. But though this term has been generally
accepted, in default of a better, for the last twenty years, it
has always been regarded as unsatisfactory and misleading,
and only the inability of scholars to unite upon one definite
centre for the style has prevented its being supplanted. Up
to the present time no definite origin had been assigned to it,
except Chalcis.2 A hint to the solution was given some years
ago by the excavations at the Necropole del Fusco at Syracuse,
and at Megara Hyblaea, conducted by Orsi. But with the
close of the American excavations at the Argive Heraeum, con-
1 *Bronzefunde aus Olympia,' Abh. d. Berl. Akad. 1879, pp. 46, 51.
2 Helbig, Die Italiker in der Po-ebene, p. 84. Helbig's view is also sup-
ported by DUmmler (Jahrh. 1887, p. 19), and more recently by Stuart Jones
{J.H.S. 1896, p. 333).
American Journal of Archaeology, Second Series Vol. IV (1900) Plate VI
o'
"^^S^
ARGIVE LEKYTHI IN THE BOSTON MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS: NO. IH
THREE AEGIVE LEKYTHI 445
ducted by Dr. Charles Waldstein, this so-called Protocorinthian
style was found there in such quantities as to justify him in
his idea from the beginning of the excavations that the so-
called Protocorinthian style is of Argive origin, a view since
expressed by Furtwangler.^ This ware found at the Heraeum
far exceeded any other class of vases found on the site, and
was present in larger quantities than at any other Greek site,
not excepting Syracuse and Megara Hyblaea. It is, of course,
true that mere quantity is not alone sufficient to give a name
to a class of vases, but considering the great activity of the
Argolid during the Mycenaean epoch as a centre of the vase
industry, the close connection between this style and the Myce-
naean, which will be shown below, and the fact that at the
Heraeum alone have we a full development of the style from
beginning to end, the adoption of the term ' Argive ' becomes
extremely probable, if not absolutely certain, and is at least
a far more satisfactory term than 'Protocorinthian.'
I regret that pending the appearance of my article on the
vase fragments of the Heraeum, shortly to appear in the report
of the excavations, I can only, in the compass of this article,
briefly outline the theory which has been more fully developed
there. Besides affirming its Argive origin, I believe that the
Argive style is not, as has been heretofore supposed, a connect-
ing link between the geometric and Corinthian styles, but
rather a direct offshoot of the Mycenaean style, and contempo-
raneous with the geometric, being finally succeeded by the
Corinthian.
In the first place, fragments of this style were found at the
Heraeum in the lowest levels, along with Mycenaean fragments,
which was the same case at Aegina, according to Diimmler Qoc,
eit.'). Secondly, the vases and fragments of the former style
were seen to fall into three classes, with connecting links
between them. I shall term these three classes of Argive ware,
Early, Linear, and Oriental. It may be easily seen that the
prevailing principle of the Argive style is linear, i.e. a use of
1 Berl Phil Wochenschrift, 1895, p. 202.
446 JOSEPH CLARK HOPPIN
pure line ornamentation, as opposed to pictorial ornamentation
(as in the Mycenaean), since the belly of Argive vases is deco-
rated with a series of parallel lines, stripes, or bands, varying
from lines of a hair's-breadth to much coarser ones. Now, in the
decadence of the Mycenaean style, the pictorial motives, which
play so large a part in the earlier classes, become conventional-
ized, and, in the later period (the third and fourth classes of
the style, Furtwangler and Loeschcke, Mykenische Vasen^ p. viii),
the tendency to ornament the bellies ' of vases with parallel
stripes or lines becomes very noticeable. Among the Heraeum
vases, there appear several of a lekythos shape, with short neck,
whose sole decoration consists of parallel lines or bands, the
technique, in clay, glaze, and decoration, being closely allied to
the Mycenaean. Also, of similar technique and decoration, a
number of vases resembling very strongly the ' pseudamphora,'
save that they have but one handle. The shapes, however, are
not those of the Mycenaean style proper, and hence must be
assigned to a transitional period. This forms the first of our
Argive classes.^
The second class ('Linear Argive') is connected with the
first by several links. It would seem that after the introduc-
tion of the geometric style into the Argolid, the Argive style,
while keeping its linear principle intact, borrowed freely from
its neighbor the various geometric motives, and that the two
styles flourished, side by side, for at least a century and a
half. Two shapes are characteristic of this second period : the
lekythos, which has now acquired a long neck, with a cone-
shaped body, and the two-handled bowl or 'skyphos.' While
the belly of the vase is still adorned with the same series of
parallel stripes, the rim of the skyphos, and the shoulder and
neck of the lekythos are ornamented with friezes of purely geo-
1 This classification and exposition of the Argive style differs in some respects
from that recently advanced by Dr. Waldstein (Am. Journ. of Arch, 1900,
p. 71). While agreeing with him thoroughly as to the 'linear' principle he
advocates, I have preferred to abide by my ov\m classification which was made
in Athens four years ago. This point will be discussed more thoroughly in the
forthcoming publication of the Heraeum vase-fragments.
THREE ARQIVE LEKYTHI 44T
metric motives, meanders, squares, lozenges, etc. Ray patterns
are also freely used around the bases of the lekythi. Some of
the earliest types show the later Mycenaean motives, pothooks,
zigzags, swastikas^ etc. This second period was extremely
common at the Heraeum, and is the usual type found at Syra-
cuse.^ The clay at this time, seems to have an individuality
of its own, and is of a finer and clearer variety than the geo-
metric, it is generally of a reddish or greenish gray tint, and
is similar in many ways to that used in Corinthian vases,
though enough technical differences exist to prevent the two
being confused.
With the third class (' Oriental Argive ') the geometric influ-
ence ceases. The rise of the Oriental influence in the Argolid
can only be responsible for this. That influence, which became
such a factor in the art of the seventh century in Greece, found
in the Argive style a suitable type with which to ally itself,
and, being stylistically, diametrically opposed to the whole
geometric system, finally drove it to the wall. Not that such
a change took place immediately ; we can see by later speci-
mens of the previous class that the introduction of Oriental
motives was slow, and, for a- while, geometric and Oriental
motives were extensively employed on the same vase. But
gradually geometric themes are displaced, and the human or
animal figure, with its attendant mass of extraneous ornament,
usurps the field entirely. It is to this class that the three
lekythi of this article belong.
Though small lekythi, such as ours, are among the most char-
acteristic vases of the style, they are not the only types. Larger
vases, such as skyphoi, oinochoai, etc., were found both at the
Heraeum and at Aegina.^ At the same time, the lekythos is
the favorite shape and shows better the transition between the
linear and Oriental periods of the Argive style. With the rise
of the Oriental influence, the linear principle, though not
1 Orsi, Notizie degli Scavi (Acad, dei Lincei), 1893, pp. 451 ff. ; 1895, pp. 109 ft
Cf. also J.H.S. 1890, p. 171.
2 Pallat, Ath. Mitth. 1897, p. 265.
448 JOSEPH CLABK HOP PIN
abandoned, is relegated to a secondary position, and the frieze
becomes the chief feature. Ornaments in field as a wealth of
decoration, with a free use of the incised line, are now used,
and the application of different shades of paint — maroon,
violet, red, and yellow — becomes a common and characteristic
feature.
Our analysis of the Argive style would hardly be complete
without some discussion as to its relation to its successor, the
Corinthian style, since such I assume the latter to be. This
view, as well as those just given, is entirely opposed to those
expressed by Couve^ in the latest discussion of the subject, who
denies any connection between the two, and sees in the Argive
style only an offshoot of the Dipylon : " Je crois done qu'on
pent affirmer I'entiere independance des deux groupes proto-
corinthien et corinthien . . . il serait facile de montrer que
la style proto-corinthien n'est pas autre chose qu'une degene-
rescence du style geometrique d'Athenes. . . . Comme les
vases proto-attiques, comme ceux du groupe de Phalere, comme
les vases geometriques d'ltalie, les vases proto-corinthiens repre-
sentent, par les caracteres de leur decoration, les derniers efforts
du style geometrique" (p. 22Q). I cannot believe that, had
the Heraeum material been accessible to M. Couve, he would
have expressed any such opinion, in favor of which the Heraeum,
at least, certainly furnishes no evidence. It seems to me far
more probable that the Argive style rather influenced the Pha-
leron types than vice versa; however, a discussion on this point
is rather beyond the scope of this article. But I believe that
M. Couve is certainly wrong in declaring that no connection
exists between the Argive and Corinthian styles. Such a con-
nection seems to me to be one of the few positive facts we can
gather from the Heraeum, as both styles are found there, the
Corinthian in far smaller quantities.
It is quite possible that at the beginning of the seventh cen-
tury, when the Oriental influence began to make itself felt in
Greece, it should have extended through Corinth, as well as
^ Hevue Archeologique, 1898, p. 213.
THBEE ABGIVE LEKYTHI 449
the Argolid, in which case both styles would be contempora-
neous. But the weakness of the claims of Corinth as the
originator of the Oriental Argive, setting the example through
her own peculiar fabric, lies in the fact that we have no proof
that an independent ceramic industry existed in Corinth before
the beginning of the seventh century. Mycenaean and geomet-
ric vases are found there too rarely, and the probabilities are
that such vases were imported from the Argolid or Attica.
But it is absolutely certain that from the Mycenaean times
downward, the Argolid was a very flourishing centre for the
manufacture of vases, and it is far more likely that a given
influence entering at the same time in two different places
should make itself more felt in the place having a style already
established. If the Oriental period of the Argive style and the
early Corinthian be compared, it may be easily seen that the
superiority of the former does not lie in the fact that it is
stylistically more advanced (which would be the case were the
Oriental Argive directly influenced by the Corinthian), but in
the new influence adopted by skilful potters to a style in the
manufacture of which they were thoroughly at home.^ If then
Corinth, under the pressure of the new influence, created a
type of her own, it is more than probable that she should bor-
row it from her neighbor, Argos, and then mould it to her own
devices. If the sequence of the Oriental Argive and the earlier
classes is plain at the Heraeum, equally so is the sequence of
the Corinthian and the Oriental Argive. A large number of
fragments was found which possess the characteristics of both
styles clearly marked, until finally the linear feature of the
Argive style was completely lost, and the flamboyancy of the
Corinthian rules the field.
The class to which our three lekythi belong is now well rep-
resented. Couve enumerates nineteen, giving those only on
1 Boehlau {Aus lonischen und Italischen Necropolen^ p. 113 ff.) objects to the
connection between the Argive and the Corinthian styles on the ground of the
inferiority of the Corinthian technique, and seems disposed to regard the Oriental
Argive as a Corinthian product. This objection, it seems to me, is answered by
what was said above.
450 JOSEPH CLARK HOPPIN
which the human figure or a genre scene is represented. To
this class belong all those lekythi on which a frieze of animals
is found, of more or less careful technique. It must be ad-
mitted that lekythi of this description found at the Heraeum
were not remarkable for their subjects or technique, but the
Oriental Argive class was well represented by other shapes,
skyphoi, pyxides, etc. In view of the time of the decadence
of the geometric style and the rise of the Corinthian, we may
assign to this period of the Argive style a date somewhere in
the neighborhood of the beginning of the seventh century.
Having roughly sketched the origin and development of the
Argive style, we can now proceed to the study of the vases
themselves. The subject of No. I, as we have said, is Bellero-
phon's fight with the Chimaera.
There are few subjects in Greek art more popular than this
scene,^ even from the earliest times. It is as old as Homer. ^
Whether Pegasus's share in the fight is recognized by Homer
is doubtful, there being no direct reference to him, except that
implied by the words 6eo)v repdecrcn inOrjaa^ {Iliad^ VI, 183).
Hesiod's Theogony (278 ff.) is the earliest direct literary evi-
dence for the appearance of Pegasus. The Chimaera, however,
is an integral part of the legend from the beginning, and a
monster of triple form, according to the Iliad (VI, 181) :
7rp6(T0€ Xeayv, oincrOev Se Spdfccov^ fiecrcn] Se ')(i/jLaipa^
heivov cnroirveiovaa irvpo^ fievo^ aWofievoio.
Hesiod's description is similar, save that he gives the monster
three heads — a lion's, goat's, and serpent's. All the later lit-
erature is divided between these two conceptions.
We have here to deal only with the artistic treatment of the
myth. The earliest conception of the Chimaera occurs on
1 A discussion of this myth is rather beyond the scope of this article : cf.
especially Rapp's article in Roscher's Lexicon^ I, p. 757, and the article ' Chi-
maera ' in the same volume, p. 893 ; see also Daremberg-Saglio, Diet, des Ant^
Grecques et Bomaines^ I, p. 684 (' Bellerophon ') and p. 1102 ('Chimaera') ;
Milchhoefer, Anfdnge der Kunst, p. 81.
2 Iliad, VI, 152-205.
THBEE ARGIVE LEKYTHI 451
the ' Island Stones,' and one of the earliest stones has the Chi-
maera on one side and the winged horse on the other, estab-
lishing, as Milchhoefer remarks (op, cit,^ p. 81, fig. 52), a very
early connection between the two.^ It is difficult to decide
just when the common type of the Chimaera, with the body
and head of a lion, the head of a goat growing from the lion's
back, and the tail in the form of a serpent, appears, since it is
open to question whether on the ' Island Stones,' which show
the lion's and goat's heads very plainly, we can recognize such
a tail. As far as I know, no representation of Bellerophon or
the Chimaera occurs on any vase of the Mycenaean and geo-
metric periods. A situla from Daphne in the British Museum
(B. 105 ; cf. Jahrb, 1895, p. 37, fig. 1) has Bellerophon and
Pegasus on one side, and the Chimaera on the other, but it can-
not be earlier than the sixth century, while the terracotta relief
from Melos ^ and the Camirus plate ^ are certainly of a later
date than our lekythos, which gives us probably the earliest
extant treatment of the myth in its complete form.
The sphinxes, lizard, etc., have no connection with the prin-
cipal group ; they are merely an instance of the horror vacui^
which is such a distinctive feature of the Corinthian style, due
to the Oriental influence, and are used here purely for decora-
tive purposes, not as mythological accessories. A bearded
Bellerophon, as he is here, is a marked variation from the
usual type, which represents him as a beardless youth, but as
it was the favorite custom of archaic art to represent their
gods and heroes as bearded, comment is unnecessary. The
artist of our lekythos deserves credit for one very neat touch,
since, in order to give the appearance of flying, he has repre-
sented Pegasus with all four feet in the air. This deserves
notice, for the common representation of flying all through
1 This connection became a favorite one in Corinthian coins of the fifth cen-
tury, which have Bellerophon mounted on Pegasus on the obverse, and the
Chimaera on the reverse. Pegasus alone is often found on the reverse of
Corinthian coins, as is the Chimaera on the reverse of coins of Libyon,
2 Muller-Wieseler, D.A.K. I, 52.
8 Darenberg-Saglio, Diet. I, p. 1103, fig. 1365.
452 JOSEPH CLARK HOPPIN
this period, never reaches such a pitch of realism ; all flying
figures are portrayed with one foot, if not both, on the ground,
in the usual ' flying and running ' schema. It may be remem-
bered that on one of the Vaphio cups ('E(^?7/>t. 'Apx„ 1888-89,
pi. X, no. 1) the idea of a rapid rush is well expressed by one
of the bulls, which has all four feet clear of the ground.
There, however, the idea of motion, not flying, was the artist's
object, while here the artist has tried to represent Pegasus
hovering in the air and just about to alight.
The Chimaera is the conventional type, and from the red
tongue with its curious forked shape, we may perhaps assume
that the artist was trying to justify the epithet of Seivbv airo-
TTveiovaa irvpo^ fievo^. The snake's head at the tip of the tail
is very delicately drawn. The scene as a whole is treated with
a broader spirit of realism than was to have been expected
from this period. As a rule, the commonest type of the battle
represents the Chimaera below, speared by Bellerophon from
above (e.^. the Melos terracotta ; cf. also Mon, d, InsL^ II, 50 ;
IX, 52 i), very much in the fashion of St. George and the
dragon, and agrees better with the description of Apollodorus
(II, 3, 2) that Bellerophon, lifted by Pegasus high in the air,
slew the monster from his lofty perch, than does our lekythos,
where a close combat seems inevitable.
Turning to the lower frieze, we find a subject extremely
popular in vase-painting during the archaic period, — the chase
of a hare by dogs. Few subjects adapt themselves better to a.
narrow frieze than this, where the action runs in long horizon-
tal lines, with no perpendicular lines to break the continuity.
Being thus decidedly linear in its feeling, it was eminently
suited to Argive style. At first it occupies the chief frieze
of lekythi of the third class, but after the tendency to por-
tray some definite scene on a vase had become widespread,
we find it relegated to a secondary position as a purely
decorative feature. This motive has been carefully analyzed
1 For a collection of the various monuments relating to the scene, see:
Fischer, Bellerophon, Leipsic, 1851, pp. 66-80.
THREE ARGIVE LEKYTHI 453
by Loeschcke,^ who traces it back to the Hesiodic shield of
Herakles, through the influence of metal work.
No. II seems more similar to No. I than No. Ill, though
many points of difference exist between them. We may re-
gard it as the last of the three chronologically, since the style
is more closely allied to the Corinthian type proper. The lack
of ornaments in field is remarkable. At first sight the most
plausible interpretation of the scene is Bellerophon and the
Chimaera over again, but against such an interpretation diffi-
culties present themselves at once. If the warrior be Bellero-
phon, Pegasus, the sine qua non of the contest, is wanting ;
and if the monster be the Chimaera, it has a human head in-
stead of a goat's, and no serpent's tail. Moreover, no instance
of Bellerophon's fight against the Chimaera, without Pegasus,
can be found. The human head in the lion's back may be
paralleled by a plate from Praeneste,^ where we have several
plastic figures of lions with human heads growing from their
backs. But though several instances of the Bellerophon myth
can be found on Etruscan mirrors, the Praeneste plate, which
is certainly not Phoenician, has no connection with the legend.
Of the lekythi in Couve's list. No. 14 seems to bear a strong
resemblance to No. II, but such resemblance is of pui-ely nega-
tive value. The two sphinxes there portrayed have nothing
whatever to do with the warrior ; were he attacking a sphinx,
we should have a close analogy at once. It must be remem-
bered that during the Oriental period in Greek art, especially
in vase-painting, there was a great fondness for portraying
monsters or animals with attributes entirely foreign to their
natures, as gryphons, sirens, or birds and beasts with human
heads. On Corinthian vases,^ we find these fantastic crea-
tures intermingled with human figures which have no more
significance than the monsters themselves. No. 14 is a good
example of this.
1 Arch. Zeit. 1881, p. 29.
2 Mo7i. d. hist. X, pi. 31, 1, 1 h.
8 Cf. Wilisch, Altkorinthische Thonindustrie, p. 44.
454 JOSEPH CLAEK HOPPIN
The winged demon is not a new feature, and occurs, in fact,
on No. 5, while the panther is one of the commonest motives on
Corinthian vases. Neither of these figures, as we have seen,
has any relation with the central group. It may, of course,
be questioned whether the artist did not have some idea of the
Bellerophon myth, distorted, perhaps, in his mind, but such is
probably not the case. Instances of combats between two men,
or men and animals, are so common on vases of this period that
we can only recognize here a simple battle between a man and
a lion, with the addition to the latter of a human head, due to
that spirit of fantasy which is so characteristic of Greek art at
this period.
No. Ill is by far the most interesting of our lekythi, but the
most obscure, since it presents three problems, of which no
exact solution seems possible : first, the proper arrangement of
the group ; second, the identification of the two male figures ;
and, lastly, the interpretation of the object on which the birds
are perched.
The centaur occupies the central position in the front of the
lekythos, while the running figure with the sword falls almost
directly beneath the handle, so that the chief interest lies in the
centaur and his opponent. That some definite mythological
scene is here presented is too evident to be disputed, so that
the running figure cannot be considered as an accessory, but
must be part of the action. Two explanations are possible :
either the centaur is being attacked in front and rear by his
opponents, or else he is pursuing the running figure, and is
checked by the other. The latter explanation seems the more
probable since the curious object with the birds lies between the
running figure and the centaur. It is obvious that if the
former scheme had been intended, this object, which is proba-
bly a mere ornament in field having no connection with the
scene, would have been placed below the handle, entirely out of
the action. Clearly, then, a pursuit of some sort is represented.
The presence of the centaur confines the meaning still fur-
ther, since the scenes on vases which contain him, although
THREE ARGIVE LEKYTHI 455
numerous, are generally variations of the same myth, Herakles's
Centauromaehia. To recognize the centaur's opponent as Her-
akles, seems the only possible solution. At first sight he lacks
the conventional attributes, the lion skin, club or bow, but these
are not always found with representations of Herakles. The
sword, as an attribute of Herakles, occurs quite frequently on
vase-paintings (cf. Furtwangler in Roscher's Lexicon^ I, 2140).
The variation consists here in the sword being fastened at the
side, not swung in the hand. Two scenes, however, make the
identification certain : first, an Attic black-figured amphora of
the earliest type in Athens (^Ant, Denk, I, 57), where Herakles,
bearded, clad in a short chiton, and armed only with a sword,
is fighting the centaur Nessus ; and second, a Corinthian sky-
phos, in the possession of Rayet (J,H,S.^ I, 1 ; also in Rayet
and Collignon, Hist, de la Ceram. grec^ p. 55, fig. 31), on
which Herakles, entirely naked, with a branch in each hand,
puts the centaurs to flight. The attitude of Herakles on the
latter vase is almost identical with his attitude on our lekythos.
The centaurs on the Rayet skyphos hold branches in their
hands which end in roots, and Herakles also seems to hold the
root of a tree in his left ; in view of this, there can be no rea-
sonable doubt that the object in the left hand of Herakles on
oar lekythos, is no thunderbolt or axe, but simply the large
root of some tree.
Behind Herakles is a figure which, from the absence of a
beard, is clearly a youth. To identify this figure as Herakles's
comrade and helper, lolaos, is a possibility. He is found on a
black-figured lekythos in Munich (No. 772), where Herakles is
pursuing the centaur, Eurytion, and on a vase in Athens
(No. 403 ; see Roscher's Lexicon^ II, 288 c?), as a companion of
the combat on Mt. Pholoe. This combat would seem to be the
one intended here, since the absence of a female figure shows
clearly that no treatment of the Nessus ^ or Eurytion contests
1 Only Herakles and Nessus are represented on the Nessus vase in Athens, but,
as the other half of the vase is entirely restored in plaster, it is quite possible
that a female figure was represented there.
456 JOSEPH CLARK HOPPIJSF
was intended. Less probable would be to recognize a Lapith
combat with the two warriors, as Theseus and Perithoiis. It
must be admitted that the exact identification of the scene is
doubtful, but that Herakles, at least, is here represented, seems
to me positively certain.
I can offer no satisfactory explanation for the object on which
the birds are perched, having been unable, after a careful
search, to find any object which resembles it in any way.
On the Rayet skyphos, two objects are associated with Hera-
kles's Centauromachia — the cask of Pholos and the altar from
which the brands were taken. Neither identification suits tlie
case here. The presence of the birds seems to warrant our
seeing in it a mere ornament in field. The two flying eagles
evidently serve that purpose, and the birds are perched on it
with perhaps a similar spirit to that shown in the figures of
cocks perched on the columns of Panathenaic amphoras. It
seems fairly certain, however, that the object, whatever it may
be, has no connection with the action of the vase.
A few technical points are worthy of notice. The frieze on
the shoulder is of slightly better execution than the main
frieze, but presents no striking features. The centaur is rep-
resented in the older form with human forelegs,^ and in similar
fashion to the gold hormus from Camirus,^ where a complete
human figure is represented, to which the body and legs of a
horse have been added, with no attempt at a symmetrical junc-
ture. The hair on all the figures is treated in the same ar-
rangement of ribbed lines found on the archaic Apollo figures
(especially the Apollo from Tenea). The drawing and execu-
tion are poor, and the whole style rather primitive in character.
We may safely regard this lekythos as the oldest of the three.
The discussion of the general scheme of ornamentation has
been reserved for the last, it being of less importance than the
subject-matter of the lekythi themselves. The distinctive or-
nament of the three is the plait pattern, or guillocJie^ used as
the handle decoration on all, and below the hare-hunt of No. I.
1 Cf. Roscher's Lexicon^ II, 1076. 2 Salzmann, Necropole de Camirus, pi. i.
THREE ARGIVE LEKYTHI 457
That the motive is derived from metal work, more probably
from shields, is fairly certain. In passing, it is worth while to
€all attention to a suggestion of Loeschcke's (^Arch. Zeit.^ 1883,
p. 59), that we may recognize iii the words irepl h' dvruya
fidXXe (j>a€tvr}v rplirXaKa fiapfiaperfv (Iliad^ XVIII, 479), a
triple woven rim of this description. A double plait may be
found on Mycenaean vases, ^ and I have noted several instances
of this ornament on Mycenaean fragments from the Heraeum.
The rays, waves, meanders, etc., have no esj^ecial interest;
they aye all characteristic ornaments of the Mycenaean period.
The palmette of No. I resembles strongly that of Couve's
No. 4, the Berlin lekythos, and it is evident that we have in this
period one of the earliest essays in the use of the motive before
it attained its full development. Different is the treatment of
the palmette on No. II, which is very similar to the capital
of an Ionic column (cf. Boehlau, op, cit. p. 110, fig. 61). The
scroll between the two sphinxes is curious, and suggests the
eaduceus of Hermes ; it is, however, a purely conventional
motive, elaborated perhaps from a Mycenaean flower pattern
(cf. Myk,. Vas.^ pi. xxxi, 293). The numerous other designs,
Mvastikas^ four-barred sigmas, pothooks, rosettes, etc., are no
new feature ; most of them are relics of the Mycenaean style,
and almost all may be found on Melian ^ or Rhodian vases.
We have seen that the Argive style is older than has been
supposed heretofore, dating certainly from Mycenaean times.
That its manufacture did not continue after the seventh cen-
tury seems a reasonable supposition, in view of the fact that
no fragments of this style were found at Naucratis (cf. Smith,
J,R.S,^ 1890, p. 176). Certain it is, however, that from the
beginning of the eighth century it played a most important part
in the Argolid, and during the seventh century became one of
the most popular styles in Greece and her various colonies.
Joseph Clark Hoppin.
^ Furtwangler and Loeschcke, Ilykenische Vasen, pi. xxxiv, 3B8.
2 For the scrolls beneath the main friefze of No. 11, cf, Conze, Melische
Vasen, pi. v.